War on Drugs snares 12-year-old with powdered sugar

T

tyme

Administrator
http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_042233323.html
Boy Charged With Felony For Powdered Sugar
Police Say Sugar Brought To School Look-Alike Drug

(CBS) AURORA Police in Aurora have confirmed that a 12-year-old boy who said he brought powdered sugar to school for a science project last week has been charged with a felony for possessing a look-alike drug.

The sixth grade student at Waldo Middle School in Aurora also was suspended for two weeks from school after showing the bag of powdered sugar to his friends.

The boy, who is not being identified because he is a juvenile, said two other boys asked if the bag contained cocaine after he showed it to them in the bathroom Wednesday morning. The boy's mother said he told them it did, but then added, "just kidding."

Aurora police arrested the boy after a custodian at the school reported the boy's comments. The youngster was taken to the police station and detained before being released to his parents that afternoon.
Click to expand...
Thank goodness they caught him. He might have grown up to be something evil... an organic chemist with a sense of humor, for instance.

It seems that anyone who jokes about drugs -- while in possession of something that's vaguely the same consistency -- is now a felon.
 
The kid when asked if it was cococaine should have been like, "Yes" and opened the bag to take a few nostrils full. *sNoRT* Ah yeah that's the stuff. "Give that to me young man!"

Yeah, pretty soon the school won't allow bags of sugar.

If the wanksta want to sell wax as crack and sugar as cocaine then so be it. Let him get taken care of the old0fashioned way.

Never ceases to amaze me what these children are capable of.
 
I think we should stop referring to it as the War on Drugs.

Every time that term is used, it legitimizes the use of the force being used to implement it.

It should be called what it is. Prohibition-II. Stopping people, by force, from doing something that shouldn't be a crime because it has no victim except for busybodies worried that somebody, somewhere might be having fun.
 
So now we have a 12 year old possible felon? Off to prison with him, he is a menace to society. He needs to have his voting and firearm rights stripped and never get them back.
 
There is absolutely no moral difference between supporting and applauding felony charges for a person having "look-alike drugs", and supporting felony charges for a Californian possessing an airsoft gun that looks just like a banned assault rifle.

There's no need for a gun ban to get rid of guns. Just make everything a felony, even possessing something that looks like an illegal object or substance, and you can deny those "felons" gun ownership rights for life.

To all those who stand by, applaud and say "drugs are different", just wait...your turn is coming, and you won't see that train until it has run you over.
 
The weakest minds get into education as a profession. That's a fact.
Click to expand...
IIRC, Marko is "getting into education as a profession". I wouldn't call him a "weak mind".

My wife spent 15 years as a preschool teacher, leaving only to become a stay at home mom for our daughter. If I called her a "weak mind", she'd probably hurt me.

I've even considered "getting into education" because I actually enjoy teaching people. With my graduate degree and 10years in IT, I must be a "weak mind" as well.

How's that broad brush working for you?

Chris
 
Marko maybe I just miss read you but no airsoft guns are banned in California. In fact airsoft guns aren't even considered replica firearms in California, they're considered bb guns. California is the airsoft capital of the States.
 
You can fault the school administrators for enforcing that law, but you can't fault them for its existence. They didn't write it.

You asked for those laws if you support the War on Drugs. Politicians write them because that's what the public wants, and administrators enforce them because that's what the public wants.

As long as enough people either applaud those laws or don't open their mouths against their enforcement, more stupid laws like this will get written and enforced.

Marko maybe I just miss read you but no airsoft guns are banned in California.
Click to expand...

Yes, you did misunderstand me. I said that felony charges for someone with a "make-believe drug" are as immoral and stupid as if you were to charge a Californian with possession of a "make-believe assault weapon" because he has an airsoft G36 in his closet. The point is that if you support a felony charge for powdered sugar, then you can't speak up against a felony charge for an airsoft machine gun, because they're on the same moral level.
 
School teachers aren't the problem. I think it's that the most moronic busybodies with nothing else to do in life are the ones that get on school boards and make these idiotic rules.

I know some schoolteachers who are stupid as bricks and others who are very bright.
 
Marko:

Consider calling it Prohibition - which people have already proven they don't like, not a War, which apparently people DO like.
 
I think there must be more to this story than meets the eye. A crime requires both act and intent. In this case there is no act, since, even if the student intended to possess drugs, he in fact did not. Possession of sugar is not against the law. I wonder if the reporter got the facts straight, or might even (gasp!) be putting a spin on the story.

Tim
 
There's no need for a gun ban to get rid of guns. Just make everything a felony, even possessing something that looks like an illegal object or substance, and you can deny those "felons" gun ownership rights for life.

To all those who stand by, applaud and say "drugs are different", just wait...your turn is coming, and you won't see that train until it has run you over.
Click to expand...


That about sums it up. Its not a War on Drugs, it is a War on the Bill of Rights.
 
A crime requires both act and intent.
Click to expand...
Some crimes require act and intent. Some only require act.
There are likely some which only require intent.

I'm not sure what the threshold for this particular law is, but possession crimes typically only require the act.
 
bill of rights

We need to do background checks on these people that make these kind of rules, to see who they are tied to. I also suggest that you make copies of the Bill of Rights,and the Constitution, and hand them out everywhere. We need to wake people up! When good men do nothing, evil prevails.
 
I'm going to stick my neck out here, but recalling from one or two books about just plain crime, all crimes require intent. I think some laws are written so that there are ways to INFER intent from the circumstances.

An example is murder. Clearly, premeditated (1st degree) has requires intent. Non-premeditated (2nd degree), I think, is like murder in the heat of passion, which, while not requiring forethought, still reqires you to intend to murder.

Even manslaughter requires intent. I think if somebody pushed you off a building and you fell on another person, killing him, you could not be found guilty of manslaughter. There was absolutely no criminal intent (on your part) there. But if you threw a cement block off a building carelessly and it hit and killed somebody, you DID have intent. Not to kill, necessarily, but to do an act most would consider having potential to kill.

I can't recall ALL the necessary elements of a crime right now, but I am pretty sure intent is one of them. Lawyers?
 
"Some crimes require act and intent. Some only require act. There are likely some which only require intent."

If one is charged with violation of a statute, intent is presumed, but the requirement for intent is there.

Tim
 
I'm going to stick my neck out here, but recalling from one or two books about just plain crime, all crimes require intent.
Click to expand...

Statutory rape doesn't require knowledge that the victim is under age. It simply requires the act. It's, to the best of my recollection, the only strict liability offense.
 
The boy is not in trouble for having a substance that looks like cocaine He is in trouble for having a substance that looks like cocaine and trying to pass it off as cocaine to other boys in a restroom.

the whole story is never told in these articles, lots of unanswered questions.
Like when did he say "Just kidding"? Before or after he saw the adult.
Why did he tell the other boys that it was coke, to see if they would snort it or to seem cool or because he was just kidding?

How much jail time has he done?
Has he been officially charged or just arrested, the police do not charge you for a crime they merely arrest you on suspicion.

Whether you agree with the war on drugs or not, misrepresenting a legal substance as an illegal drug is illegal and subject to disciplinary action.

Living in California is usually subject to disciplinary action
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top